This is very long, but I think it brings up things we can/should be discussing
on this forum, mostly, should we advocate for people to go off their meds or
not?
Interesting article in the Oregon paper. Mostly very cool. However, in at
least 2 places, the writer specifies that "Safe, Inc." does not advocate going
off meds. Through a fortunate connection where I live, I am able to speak with
many people diagnosed with mental illnesses in group and one-on-one settings
and, ultimately, we end up talking about the medicalization of mental "illness"
and medication. In disAbility culture (prior to those with mental illness
questioning the scientific validity of diagnosis), there has been a lot of
discussion about how overmedicalizing something increases the stigma of the
person diagnosed (Foucault is always fun reading, also a book, "Make Them Go
Away", in addition to lots of other stuff). So how should those of us who have
access to multitudes (or even just one) persons diagnosed with mental illness
discuss this issue of medication?
I have had my own struggles with mental and emotional ups and downs and
sideturns and was prescribed anti-anxiety and anti-depressant medications for
over 5 years for such issues. Recently (about 5 months ago), after reading Mad
in America, I decided to go off my meds (slowly and wisely) as the only benefit
I saw was, perhaps, emotion regulation. Unfortunately, what emotion regulation
also did was stall my resolution of trauma for five years. I will admit,
though, that one of the reasons going off of meds (which I am finally through)
has been successful is that I chose to do it in a time in my life that was not
complicated by too many other stresses. I was diagnosed five years ago with
OCD, though have had symptoms since age 5 (I wholesale reject the label at this
point and simply refer to myself as a trauma survivor). When deciding to go
off meds, I had to really ask myself, am I any better, as far as my symptoms of
"OCD" and the grief the thoughts and behaviors
give me, than five years ago. The answer was a resounding "no". The only
reason I was less upset at times was because I was less feeling. I was denied
my own grief of having been abused by my both of my parents, which I can
finally get back to resolving. While I respect individuals who do not feel
that they can go off meds at the present point in their life (usually b/c
society cannot handle the emotional expressions that come when people oppress
them), I do believe that we should be advocating for people to ditch their
meds. Kind of as a civil disobedience act if you will. I understand, having
met a lot of individuals who self-identify as mentally ill, that there are
complexities (the side effects of coming off, the inability of society to
accept different ways of behaving and thinking)...but if we let this (and I do
believe it is for these reasons most people do not come off their meds) keep us
attached to a patriarchal, capitalist and all other bell hooks
described adjectives to our society, we are defeated in my mind. I think our
best options are places like The Freedom Center in Mass. or Soteria houses,
etc., because, inevitably, when we come off our meds or if we never take them,
people will have experiences where they need more support than our nuclear
families or disjointed communities can provide.
The article in the Oregon paper emphasized a need for choice in the mental
health system. I am all for choice, and talking about alternatives is an
important focus, but before we can intelligently discuss these things, we have
to get our people out of the clutches of death. If the people in Montgomery,
instead of boycotting the bus system, said, well, let's talk about alternatives
to segregation or emphasize choice for people, like having lots of "black only"
restaurants, instead of saying, no, this is wrong, let's root it out entirely,
segregation never would have been abolished. Even protest is not effective
enough. The reason why protest no longer works to end discrimination is
because most people are educated by the media and the media is controlled by
big pharma, among other things. The media says there were only 100,000 vs.
500,000 at a war protest, people believe it and continue to be pleased with a
Congress who makes nonbinding statements and resolutions
against the war. The media says that such and such a drug may cause diabetes
when it clearly has, people believe it and continue to take the drugs or, at
least, make nonbinding statements or resolutions to question them. If we do
not come out, and say, no more, we will not take your drugs, we will not go to
your psychiatrist-watched day programs. If we do not create those places like
The Freedom Center for our people to go when in crisis (much like church
basements during the Civil Rights movement), things will not change. In a
hyper-capitalistic society, only boycott works. Only supply and demand is
understood.
While people were sympathetic to those who could not boycott the bus for
different reasons, it was pressed upon each person that they should do
everything in their power to boycott if they wanted to see a change in the
system. We are coming to that time. As enough alternatives are built (and we
will have to do this without pay) and networks solidified, there will come a
time when we will have to ditch our meds en masse. It is already happening and
we shouldn't be afraid to say so. We need to demand that people accept us for
who we are and listen to how their part in this society has hurt us.
Government sponsored programs, like Safe, Inc., ultimately will not free us,
b/c they have a stake in the system, which is why they refuse to advocate for
people to come off their meds and focus on all of this choice bs. How can we
know what choices to advocate for if we stay on our meds which not only dull
our minds, but prevent us from radically exploring other alternatives?
This is how I handle it. When I am speaking with folks, lets say, in a
continuing day treatment program and we start talking about meds, I tell people
not to trust anyone in the human services system b/c 9 times out of 10, if it
came down to advocating for you vs. losing their job, they would choose their
job, and who can blame them with such a sh*tty government support system. I,
myself, have worked in human services before and plan to do so again, so I know
those 9/10ths of individuals...many of them really very nice and caring, but
who feel as if their hands are tied and who are lied to, as well. I tell the
"consumers" the side effects and history of the drugs, the (lack of)
research...I quote Mad in America. I even had one sympathetic worker recently
actually copy the entire book for her group to read excerpts from in one of
their "sessions". I don't say, "go off your drugs now"...I tell them to do it
slowly and with the help of a doctor, if they can. i tell
them the side effects of withdrawal. I tell them they can sue for liable if
their doctor won't help them.
To support us as we do this advocacy, we need what are sometimes referred to
as self-advocacy or people-first groups (not just peer or consumer groups),
much like in the developmental disability rights movement. They were successful
because they got together locally, and then were able to do so nationally and
they knew when to say, "this is wrong; and I will leave my wheelchair behind
and wriggle up capital hill steps to show you." Unfortunately, many of them
have been coopted by government sponsorship, but they were able to get some
work done initially and throngs of them still are fighting today. As they
supported one another in abandoing their wheelchairs that kept them alive,
dependence on our peers and the risk of losing everything is what we must be
willing to act on to change the system. Our meds, our jobs, our lives. We are
in a war, make no mistake about it. It's not time to talk about how Iraq's
democratic system might function if we helped them with this
or that, it's not time to talk about how our mental health system might
function if doctors did this or that, it's time to tell the invaders to get the
hell out and to figure it out ourselves, however warped they have made us
believe we are.
Although not everyone will initially be able to come off meds, in order to be
legitimate, it is time for some to go off their meds, indeed as some are
already doing, like Rosa Parks refusing to move from her seat, and for
spokespeople among us to rise up and be brave enough to say, "What has been
done to us for hundreds of years is wrong. These meds are based on false
science. They are a lie. We will not sit idly by and watch you vaporize
lives. We will tell people the truth and not be afraid. We will risk poverty.
We will risk our lives. We will risk jail." Those spokespeople...Jim
Gottstein, Vera Sharav, David Oaks, are arriving, thank goodness, but as of yet
we have not had a Rosa Parks moment, someone who is willing to publicly say
"no" to the law, a Daniel Berrigan who will burn the draft files, although I am
sure that there are hundreds, if not thousands, of individuals who now hold the
zyprexa documents. Depending on the court's decision, those people may
need to show their strength one day. They will need to support Jim, Vera and
David and not keep silent and comply. Only one person doing this won't work,
which is why Eli Lilly naming those 8 or so people they did was so effective at
scaring people into handing over the documents (though I have faith, note, not
any evidence, some made copies). Thousands of people saying, "we have the
documents and we are spreading them and we will not destroy them" just may
work. Is there a way, via the Internet, whereby to create a tally of folks who
have the documents and how many people they gave them to, anonymously? Is
there anyone out there who has studied propaganda distribution to be able to
mathematically deduce or even just, based on history, anecdotally deduce, from
that number, approximately how many people might have them now or what the
political strength is in the number of people who hold them? There must be a
story somewhere in the annals of history. With enough
numbers, people may feel freer to identify themselves should they need to.
Or, maybe we can start by making a pledge form whereby people can
electronically sign on to say, "Yes, I will do what it takes, even to the
extent of civil disobedience, to end the lies propogated by the pharmaceutical
and psychiatric systems which harm and kill people." This way, we are not
owning up to any already committed act of civil disobedience or even a
particular one, we are just saying that we are willing to, which, in my
laymen's knowledge of the law, cannot be prosecuted...especially since, even if
conspiring, we are not saying what law, particularly, we would be conspiring to
break. It's kind of like saying, on a philosophical level, would you break the
law to save the one you love. Of course we can say that. What do folks think
about this?
But more than Zyprexa, are all of the psychiatric medications out there. We
need to find more ways to let people know not just that they can cause bad side
effects or that there are alternatives, but that their creation is based on
non-science, on a lie...that we are being lied to, whether by the drug
companies doing anything illegal or just conspiratorially unethical doesn't
matter...it's a lie. It's info. they don't want getting out. It's the basis
for a major boycott. How we get that info. to mental health consumers and
mental health workers is something we need to plan a major strategy around.
Again, another topic for discussion.
Yes, we need to urge individuals to go off their meds safely (notice I did
not say force). They are toxins in our systems. They are another lie which
deepens our depression. They are a tool of the oppressor. We should not be
afraid to say this. I realize we can't all do it right now...as I said, the
more alternatives are built, the more we clarify our philosophy as disAbility
culture has done, the more people can leave the system. But challenge
yourself. You may be the pioneer someone else needs to hear from to go off
safely. I often wonder, if psychotic states of mind were permissible in our
society, would individuals experiencing them find them so disturbing that they
felt the need to change them. The oppression is so deep it has been
internalized. Ask yourself, what was really so horrible about how you felt
before medication...or was it that you couldn't work, or couldn't have a
husband and a white picket fence, or had no one to help you raise your children
or that you slept more than the 8 hours a "normal" person sleeps that had you
feeling horrible. If you were loved, supported and accepted as you were, to
the point where any functional deficits were taken care of, would you still
desire meds? Indeed, would you still be "sick?" Because all of those things
can be changed...we can create better services, create a socially responsible
economic system that values life over production. But if we continue to create
or demand services that merely adapt to, and do not fundamentally change, the
problem, we are just as culpable in the deterioration of people's mental
wellbeing as big business. Why, when so many "white papers" and consumer
reports have been written on state levels asking for alternative services, are
we on more meds than ever, is Medicaid still refusing to reimburse
accupuncture, etc.? Some problems can be corrected from within a system...this
one cannot...it is too deep. It is rotten to the roots, as Mad in
America will assure you of, indeed, even a simple historical inquiry into the
beginnings and growth of the social work field can make obvious, and a new tree
needs to be planted, with only those who have experienced extreme and alternate
mental and emotional states and our staunchest allies (that 1/10th who would
risk their jobs for their clients) as the planters.
I know some people will disagree. I do not judge anyone who chooses to stay
on meds. It's a messed up world we live in and some days it is just one day at
a time (I am in a 12 step program, so I can identify with that), but some days
it's more than just one day at a time...it's hundreds of years of enslavement,
it's our children's future, it's your future. That day came for me five months
ago. I am not here to say, "You can do it" and face no problems or even that I
have been 100% effective. Would some days I prefer the emotion numbing
functional, fun Amy? Yes. But I know it is not honest, most of all, to
myself. Being a part of MindFreedom, this discussion, reading on the Icarus
Project...all of these things are helping me stay sober (ha!). thanks for
that, and let's spread the truth of the psychiatric and pharmaceutical system
to others and not allow big pharma to scare us back into their mental illnesses.
peace-
Amy
Rafael <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
And another: